The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1887-04-22
NO VERDICT.
The Jury in the Haddock Case Disagrees
1t Stands Eleven to Ono for AquittaI
and Is Discharged - Synopsis of the
Courts Instructions.

1ne Jury IN the Aaddock case Dis9CreeS
1T Stands Eleven to Ono for Aquittal
and Is Discharged - Synopsis of the
Courts Instructions.
SIOUX CRY, la, April 1S.-As nearly
every one expected, the jury in the Arens-
dorf case has disagreed, and was dis
charged, after being out twenty hours.
Judge Lewis called the jurors before him
at noon yesterday, and asked them if they
had decided upon verdict Foreman
Webster said they had not, but that he did
not believe they wanted the case taken
from them yet There was one stubborn
man of the jury, but he thought be-
fore another night they could arrive at
verdict Juror Dennis O'Connell arose,
and, addressing the court said that he
had made up his mind upon the case
in the fear of God and without any re-
gard to the favor of man. He had consid-
cred the case carefully and wished to
do justice as between man and man and to
his country, and his God, and if he was
kept there three, or four weeks he should
not change his opinion. The Judge said
that, this being the condition of affairs, it
would probably be useless to keep the jury
out longer, and he accordingly discharged
them.
There is considerable comment on tho
street upon the action of the Judge in dis
charging tho jury, and the friends of
Arensdorf are loud in their denunciation
of his action, while others say that in view
of the statement of Juror o. Connell he was
justified in doing as he did. After the
jury went out Saturday afternoon one Of
the principal attorneys for the defense
stated that he had urged when the case
first came up that the plea of self-defense
be made, but that his associates overruled
him. This is regarded as significant fact
On Saturday, after Mr.. O'Connell had
concluded his argument for the State,
Judge Lewis instructions were read. A
synopsis is as follows:
The first point which referred to matters
under dispute was in regard to the alleged con-
spiracy. Upon this point the judge instructed
that in determining the question they should
take into consideration the prosecutions
to close the saloons which were being con-
Quoted August 8, 1886, and on other days just
previous, the part Haddock was taking in
these prosecutions, the relations of Arensdorf
and the alleged conspirators to these
prosecutions, the state of feeling in the
court and on the streets, the appearance of
Arensdorf and the alleged conspirators on the
street the night of the murder, the meeting
at Junk's and Holdenried's Hall and at War
lichs, and other facts tending to show the
connection of the defendants with such con-
spiracy, if conspiracy there was. If there
was found to be a conspiracy the State was
entitled to show all actions, conduct and
declarations of the conspirators whether
in or out of his presence during the tendency
of the conspiracy tending to show the connec-
ton of defendant with the conspiracy. The de-
Tense allege that the indictment did not aver
conspiracy. On this point the jury was n
I rako1 A11n4 %In nsl
to allow of the evidence admitted, and
if the jury was satisfied that the con-
spiracy was formed it was for them
to determine whether the defendant entered
into it, and then all evidence concerning him
was admssible-ofh his acts conduct and declara-
| tions during its pendency, whether had in the
defendants presence or not Upon the ques-
| ton of the testimony of Leavitt and Bismarck,
| and the evidence necessary to zorro Dorate it,
could not be convicted upon their tes-
timony alone, but it may be cor
roborated in some material point by 9TH
ers In regard to the alibi it was necessary
that it should be established by the
greater weight Of testimony, as it was On af
| firmative defense. Good character was not o
defense. 1t was only circumstance to be con-
| sidered in making up the verdict The jury
was then instructed in regard to their findings.
If they found that the defendant and others had
| entered into a conspiracy for the purpose of
whipping or injuring the person of Mr.. Haddook
AMI in furtherance of that plan he was killed
| either by defendant or by another when
| he by his presence was aiding and abet-
| ting the conspiracy, or by some other
conspirators, when the defendant being in the
| conspiracy, was not present, then he should be
| found guilty Of some of the various degrees of
the crime charged in the Indictment In re-
| gard to the impeaching testimony the judge in
| structed the jury that they shoUld not refuse
credence to testimony because Of the bad NOR
| ais OF the witnesses, but it must be taken with
caution If the witnesses were shown to be
| good and law-abiding citizens that was to be
taken into consideration.
In his closing instructions the judge took
| occasion to criticse the actions of one member
of the jury--the man Webster who, earlier in
the trial. attempted in a partisan spirit
to examine one of the States witness. In
the language of the judge the member
from the first day of the trial had
showed a stubborn disposition and a deter
minaton not to consider or study the
evidence. The court said he had never before
seen in the iury-box so fragrant violation of
the duty of a juryman, and he insisted that
when that juror was called upon to act in max
ing up a verdict id so important case he
would see the propriety Of justice in giving
that attention and deliberation that every fair
andhonest mind knows both State and defend
ant are entitled to.